The state government has signalled the possibility of lifting its ban on genetically modified crops, which could lead to major investments in a new GM cotton industry in the Ord River irrigation area.
The state government has signalled the possibility of lifting its ban on genetically modified crops, which could lead to major investments in a new GM cotton industry in the Ord River irrigation area.
Agriculture and Food Minister Kim Chance last week released a discussion paper into the potential for GM cotton production in the state’s north, which industry groups say would underwrite the development of Ord Stage Two and bring significant economic and social benefits to the region.
Mr Chance said GM cotton had been growing in trial plots in the Kimberley for more than 10 years, showing high yields without any significant problems.
The government paper detailed the benefits of GM cotton in reducing pesticide and herbicide use, increasing yields and making Australian cotton farmers more globally competitive.
It comes almost a year after the formation of the Ministerial GMO Industry Reference Group, which was tasked with identifying the main issues associated with the production of GM crops in WA.
While Queensland and New South Wales have allowed the production of GM cotton for more than 10 years, Western Australia’s GM moratorium covers both food and fibre crops.
The report said that previous attempts to grow cotton in the Ord River irrigation area during the 1960s and 1970s had failed due to high pest pressure, with large quantities of DDT and other insecticides used to control bollworm, a major cotton pest.
The report also suggests GM cotton could be grown in rotation with other crops, such as sugar, providing diversity for the region’s agricultural base.
Western Australian Farmers Federation president Trevor De Landgrafft endorsed the discussion paper, and called on the minister to lift the moratorium.
He said the introduction of a cotton industry in the Ord would support existing crops and provide the critical mass to allow associated service industries and infrastructure to develop in the region.
“It’s almost a no brainer that the minister needs to encourage cotton production in the Ord as quickly as possible,” Mr De Landgrafft said.
But other groups have challenged some of the assumptions made in the report, accusing it of overstating the benefits.
Anti-GM campaigner Julie Newman of the Network of Concerned Farmers said while the GM traits conferred the benefits of weed and insect control, benefits such as increased water use efficiency, yields and quality were due to the non-GM varieties the GM trait was added to, not the GM trait itself.
She said that, while GM cotton production in Australia to date had resulted in some of the highest yields in the world, she had doubt over some of the high yields projected for the Ord irrigation area.
“[Bt] kills only two insects, and no others. Particularly in tropical areas, you’re going to have much higher insect densities,” she said.
“It’s a bit unreasonable to expect to have higher yields than the highest yields in the world.”
Mrs Newman said Australian cotton farmers, unlike their subsidised counterparts in other countries, would be forced to bear the costs of the new technology.
“Once you look at the big picture it’s not a healthy economic option for farmers,” she said.
Mr De Landgrafft said while work was currently being done to reduce technology costs for farmers, there would need to be close monitoring of ag-biotech companies and their charges for seed.
